Right Web

Tracking militarists’ efforts to influence U.S. foreign policy

Tehran Rebuffs U.S. Overtures

Iran’s dismissive response to U.S. attempts at engagement will likely isolate it even further, much to the detriment of Middle East stability.

(Inter Press Service)

While most countries in the world welcome Washington’s conciliatory message towards Iran, some analysts in the region are skeptical.

Referring to U.S. President Barack Obama’s video message on the occasion of the Iranian New Year last week, Christian Koch of the Gulf Research Center (GRC) said Washington’s opening to Iran is a step in the right direction, but  once again Tehran is likely to miss this opportunity for rapprochement.

‘‘Obama’s gesture introduced the critical element of public diplomacy by addressing the people and leaders of Iran jointly, finally acknowledging that trying to drive a wedge between Iran’s leaders and people is unproductive,’’ Koch, director of international studies at the Dubai-based think tank, told IPS.

‘‘Unfortunately, given the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei’s dismissal of the message,” Koch added, “the likely result is the further isolation of Iran to the detriment of regional security.’’

In an attempt to end three decades of U.S.-Iran strain that has also affected other countries in the region, Obama stressed that his administration is committed to ‘‘diplomacy that addresses the full range of issues’’ and to pursuing ‘‘constructive ties among the United States, Iran, and the international community.’’

This process, Obama said, ‘‘will not be advanced by threats. We seek, instead, engagement that is honest and grounded in mutual respect.’’The U.S. president indicated that  this type of relationship “cannot be reached through terror or arms, but rather through peaceful actions that demonstrate the true greatness of the Iranian people and civilization.’’

However, Khamenei dismissed  Obama’s overtures, saying there will be no change unless the president-elect ends U.S. hostility toward Iran and ensures “real changes” in foreign policy.Iran has repeatedly sought a U.S. apology for past grievances and an end to allegations that it is seeking to produce nuclear arms.

According to independent Kuwaiti political analyst Ali Jaber Al-Sabah, , Khamenei’s reaction is symptomatic of Iran’s history of intransigence. and closely linked to its nuclear program, seen as a serious threat to the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), which comprises Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Oman, and the United Arab Emirates.

‘‘The U.S. attempt to make a new beginning with Iran will yield the same old results—defiance and non-cooperation. Iran will never abandon its nuclear program,’’ the Kuwait-based political analyst  Al-Sabah told IPS,. “Iran will never abandon its nuclear program,’’ For this reason, Iran continues to be perceived  as a serious threat by member-states of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) - Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Oman, and the United Arab Emirates.

Explaining the difference between the approaches adopted by the George Bush and Obama administrations, Al-Sabah said: ‘‘While the means are different, the end is the same. Just as Obama made a video address, it is possible that he would make a similar speech sooner or later announcing a real ‘action’ plan in response to Tehran’s inflexibility.’’

GRC’s Koch said: ‘’The past few years have made it clear that the current leadership in Tehran is not interested in true negotiations. Rather, its sole objective is to buy time to avoid making any concessions on the nuclear front. Ultimately, this is a dead-end road.’’

The international relations expert explained that ‘‘just as Gulf security cannot be accomplished without Iran, neither can it be constructed around an Iran that seeks to institutionalize its dominance over its neighbors. Any development in U.S.-Iran relations needs to be viewed within the larger context of regional Gulf security.’’

Koch added that Obama’s message is completely in line with the interests of GCC countries. ‘‘There is no appetite in the Gulf for another conflict and the GCC leaders have consistently stressed  ties based on mutual respect and the non-interference in internal affairs.’’

Koch cited several examples  of what he describes as Iran’s failure to take advantage of chances to build a constructive regional relationship: leaving unresolved the issue of the three islands of Abu Mussa and Greater and Lesser Tunbs with the UAE, failing to join the Saudi-proposed Arab peace initiative on the Arab-Israeli conflict,  and responding inadequately  to Riyadh’s proposal for a joint regional nuclear enrichment consortium.

Although  conceding that talks between Iran and its neighbors on these issues “just prolong the agony of the GCC countries,” Al-Sabah said  that talking remains “an essential part of the process towards any end. Even if it is bound to fail, it lends credibility to subsequent action.’’ 

And attempts at political rapprochement recently suffered  an additional setback. In February, a member of Iran’s powerful Expediency Council  reportedly  said that Bahrain was once Iran’s 14th province. This provocative statement was widely condemned in the Arab world. Iran’s aggressive military intent may be less worrying for now, but deep-rooted suspicion of Iran is widespread among GCC countries.

However, some observers remain optimistic. Mehran Kamrava, director of the Center for International and Regional Studies at the Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar, told IPS that Khamenei’s response to Obama “was carefully crafted and non-ideological. The next stage of improving the tense atmospherics will depend on the outcome of Iran’s presidential elections in June. Depending on the outcome of those elections, the Americans may initiate more concrete steps toward engaging Iran in a dialogue.”

Meena Janardhan writes for the Inter Press Service.





Citations

By Meena Janardhan, "Tehran Rebuffs U.S. Overtures" Right Web with permission from Inter Press Service (Somerville, MA: PRA, 2009). Web location:
https://rightweb.irc-online.org/rw/4995.html Production Information:
Author(s): Right Web
Editor(s): Right Web
Production: Political Research Associates   IRC logo 1310 Broadway, #201, Somerville, MA   02144 | pra@publiceye.org

Share RightWeb

Featured Profiles

Lindsey Graham (R-SC) is one of the Senate’s more vocal hawks, and one of the prime vacillators among Republicans between objecting to and supporting Donald Trump.


Ron Dermer is the Israeli ambassador to the United States and has deep connections to the Republican Party and the neoconservative movement.


The Washington-based American Enterprise Institute is a rightist think tank with a broad mandate covering a range of foreign and domestic policy issues that is known for its strong connections to neoconservatism and overseas debacles like the Iraq War.


Max Boot, neoconservative military historian at the Council on Foreign Relations, on Trump and Russia: “At every turn Trump is undercutting the ‘get tough on Russia’ message because he just can’t help himself, he just loves Putin too much.”


Since taking office Donald Trump has revealed an erratic and extremely hawkish approach to U.S. foreign affairs, which has been marked by controversial actions like dropping out of the Iran nuclear agreement that have raised tensions across much of the world and threatened relations with key allies.


Mike Huckabee, a former governor of Arkansas and an evangelical pastor, is a far-right pundit known for his hawkish policies and opposition to an Israeli peace deal with the Palestinians.


Nikki Haley, the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, is known for her lock-step support for Israel and considered by some to be a future presidential candidate.


For media inquiries,
email rightwebproject@gmail.com

From the Wires

The Trumpian new regional order in the Middle East is predicated on strongman rule, disregard for human rights, Sunni primacy over Iran and other Shia centers of power, continued military support for pro-American warring parties regardless of the unlawfulness of such wars, and Israeli hegemony.


A comparison of U.S. nuclear diplomacy with Iran and the current version with North Korea puts the former in a good light and makes the latter look disappointing. Those with an interest in curbing the dangers of proliferating nuclear weapons should hope that the North Korea picture will improve with time. But whether it does or not, the process has put into perspective how badly mistaken was the Trump administration’s trashing of the Iran nuclear agreement.


Numerous high profile Trump administration officials maintain close ties with anti-Muslim conspiracy theorists. In today’s America, disparaging Islam is acceptable in ways that disparaging other religions is not. Given the continuing well-funded campaigns by the Islamophobes and continuing support from their enablers in the Trump administration, starting with the president himself, it seems unlikely that this trend will be reversed any time soon.


The Trump administration’s nuclear proliferation policy is now in meltdown, one which no threat of “steely resolve”—in Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s words—will easily contain. It is hemorrhaging in part because the administration has yet to forge a strategy that consistently and credibly signals a feasible bottom line that includes living with—rather than destroying—regimes it despises or fears. Political leaders on both sides of the aisle must call for a new model that has some reasonable hope of restraining America’s foes and bringing security to its Middle East allies.


Congressional midterm elections are just months away and another presidential election already looms. Who will be the political leader with the courage and presence of mind to declare: “Enough! Stop this madness!” Man or woman, straight or gay, black, brown, or white, that person will deserve the nation’s gratitude and the support of the electorate. Until that occurs, however, the American penchant for war will stretch on toward infinity.


To bolster the president’s arguments for cutting back immigration, the administration recently released a fear-mongering report about future terrorist threats. Among the potential threats: a Sudanese national who, in 2016, “pleaded guilty to attempting to provide material support to ISIS”; an Uzbek who “posted a threat on an Uzbek-language website to kill President Obama in an act of martyrdom on behalf of ISIS”; a Syrian who, in a plea agreement, “admitted that he knew a member of ISIS and that while in Syria he participated in a battle against the Syrian regime, including shooting at others, in coordination with Al Nusrah,” an al-Qaeda offshoot.


The recent appointment of purveyors of anti-Muslim rhetoric to the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom exposes the cynical approach Republicans have taken in promoting religious freedom.


RightWeb
share